Market Currents
From Obama's weekly address: "When we receive our monthly job report next week, it is likely to...
-
Saturday, August 1, 2009, 4:14 PM ETFrom Obama's weekly address: "When we receive our monthly job report next week, it is likely to show that we are continuing to lose far too many jobs in this country. As far as I’m concerned, we will not have a recovery as long as we keep losing jobs. And I won’t rest until every American who wants a job can find one."
Other date
Latest Articles
This news story has 44 comments:
Go take a long 4 year nap.
Thanks to his speech writers. (Are they from one of the H-Y-P, or A-W-W?).
On Aug 01 05:02 PM Teutonic Knight wrote:
> For someone who has never had any successful record of running a
> private enterprise (let alone making a profit with), even so small
> as a peanut or a tofu shop, these words came across hollow. <br/>
>
> Thanks to his speech writers. (Are they from one of the H-Y-P,
> or A-W-W?).
No, those are not my words. Please read them carefully again, if you will.
I did not say anything about my preferring his predecessor King Jorge II the Oblivious and Pretentious.
TK
On Aug 01 05:06 PM nmelendez wrote:
> So i guess you prefer a previous texan who sent every company he
> owned/administered into bankruptcy, including and not limited to
> US of A.
> So i guess you prefer a previous texan who sent every company he
> owned/administered into bankruptcy, including and not limited to
> US of A.
Then you must be really upset with Obama as he has made Bush's deficit spending look like child's play. Bush spent to protect American's, whether you believe it or not. Obama spent to reward his political buddies and those crooks on Wall Street, at the same time ignoring main street except for rhetoric.
Others defend Bush and trash Obama.
When will people learn that (from a fiscal perspective) they should both be hated and reviled? Both blow/blew up the deficit and refuse to cut spending. Both are/were set on destroying the dollar. In fact, they are both really the same, fiscally speaking.
So, be like me, hate them both.
Obama's $700 billion ONE TIME stimulus is peanuts compared to Bush's multi-year wars (of course, for right wing loons any war is a good war), his $1.5 trillion deficits adding tax cuts over a decade (which by the way cost more than the CBO is predicting universal health care is going to cost) and TARP.
That man did not deserve to be elected dogcatcher let a lone President.........And, to think I voted for him once. I can't believe I was that ignorant!
On Aug 01 05:21 PM Neil459 wrote:
> On Aug 01 05:06 PM nmelendez wrote:
On Aug 01 05:57 PM Egg wrote:
> Some people defend Obama and trash Bush.
>
> Others defend Bush and trash Obama.
>
> When will people learn that (from a fiscal perspective) they should
> both be hated and reviled? Both blow/blew up the deficit and refuse
> to cut spending. Both are/were set on destroying the dollar. In fact,
> they are both really the same, fiscally speaking.
>
> So, be like me, hate them both.
>
On Aug 01 05:57 PM Egg wrote:
> Some people defend Obama and trash Bush.
>
> Others defend Bush and trash Obama.
>
> When will people learn that (from a fiscal perspective) they should
> both be hated and reviled? Both blow/blew up the deficit and refuse
> to cut spending. Both are/were set on destroying the dollar. In fact,
> they are both really the same, fiscally speaking.
>
> So, be like me, hate them both.
>
On Aug 01 06:13 PM Niner wrote:
> G W went from a $76 billion surplus in 1999 to a $407 billion deficit
> in 2008. And, that was before the bailouts. Nobody can compare to
> GW when it comes to deficits.
>
> That man did not deserve to be elected dogcatcher let a lone President.........And,
> to think I voted for him once. I can't believe I was that ignorant!
>
"But what about what Bush did ?"
How, you may be asking yourself, does such a mushminded response become so commonplace in America ?
Well, the problem begins in childhood....A young mind, full of promise, gets a 12 year dose of public schools. While many young minds escape from the ordeal with some analytical ability intact, many do not. Sadly, even advancing to college will not usually save a failed mind, as it does not have the foundation to prevent itself from being loaded up with liberal theories and touchy-feely inanity about how the world SHOULD be, as opposed to how it is. Critical analysis is never mentioned again.
This ,inevitably, leads to the typical, circular argument of "What about what so-and-so did ?". Even though so-and-so has been out of office for 6 months.
Unfortunately, if what so-and-so did was bad, the mushy mind cannot, of course, understand how massively increasing the very things so-and-so did might not be a good idea.
And so it goes.
Blaming who's in office overlooks that we, the people, are the government here, and it seems we've got exactly what we bargained for: cheap credit for a short while and debt servitude long after.
On Aug 01 06:13 PM Niner wrote:
> G W went from a $76 billion surplus in 1999 to a $407 billion deficit
> to think I voted for him once. I can't believe I was that ignorant!
>
Obama
Even that wont be enough in taxes to pay for all of the bullshit entitlements he has planned.
I'm sure Australopithicus popped out a kid in a gubmint hospital. They just knew, even then, that healthcare was a RIGHT that everyone deserved!
Entitlements are so far from anything that ever advanced humankind as to be laughable at best, scandalously suicidal at worst.
Doodah, doodah day
The word is OBAMABOTS. They so want to believe that they are willing to line up like lemmings, blindly following the critically unsighted.
On Aug 01 08:22 PM Mr. Ed, Jr. wrote:
> So, the topic of discussion is actions and statements by the current
> President, Barack Obama.
> "But what about what Bush did ?"
>
> How, you may be asking yourself, does such a mushminded response
> become so commonplace in America ?
>
> Well, the problem begins in childhood....A young mind, full of promise,
> gets a 12 year dose of public schools. While many young minds escape
> from the ordeal with some analytical ability intact, many do not.
> Sadly, even advancing to college will not usually save a failed mind,
> as it does not have the foundation to prevent itself from being loaded
> up with liberal theories and touchy-feely inanity about how the world
> SHOULD be, as opposed to how it is. Critical analysis is never mentioned
> again.
>
> This ,inevitably, leads to the typical, circular argument of "What
> about what so-and-so did ?". Even though so-and-so has been out
> of office for 6 months.
>
> Unfortunately, if what so-and-so did was bad, the mushy mind cannot,
> of course, understand how massively increasing the very things so-and-so
> did might not be a good idea.
>
> And so it goes.
The other day I responded to an incident that involved a person who was not a real threat but was percieved to be one ( hindsight ) my partner is a K9. We found him hiding ( not visible ) but the dog new he was there. I let him go and instead of straight ahead as he is trained he went around and flushed him to me ( this is his instinct) the guy saw me and did everything I asked.
So is this Obama moving the herds to treasuries or is this really when the rubber meets the road and the reality that 70% of the GDP is at least 15% unemployed. ( if you add all the real numbers)
We will see.
On Aug 01 09:51 PM Mark54 wrote:
> my lord this is rhetoric at its finest.... does he realize what he
> is saying? we have never had that situation in this country. he just
> sounds stupid and naive that is the plain indisputable truth.
> Umm...TARP was passed and signed by Bush.
More ignorance on display. Fact is Presidents do not pass legislation. Fact congress controlled by Democrats at the time had the votes to override a Presidential Veto.
FACT, TARP was voted into law by Democrats and if it were not for Democrats it could not have been made law. You need to look at who actually does things, not the propaganda coming from the media. The stupidity of some of these posters is simply amazing.
On Aug 01 05:21 PM Neil459 wrote:
> On Aug 01 05:06 PM nmelendez wrote:
He realizes exactly what he is saying, its the Obamaidiot listeners that are stupid and naive.
On Aug 01 09:51 PM Mark54 wrote:
> my lord this is rhetoric at its finest.... does he realize what he
> is saying? we have never had that situation in this country. he just
> sounds stupid and naive that is the plain indisputable truth.
> You are an idiot.
Not sure who this was targeted at but it does not matter because it is the rant of a grade schooler. Just run around and call people names rather than engage in intelligent dialog. This usually happens when people have no logical basis for their position.
You are making your mother proud. The good news is that you could spell "idiot", that puts you above 50% of the people that graduate high school in the US.
The problem is there is no outrage anymore, lying, corruption, etc is so commonplace on both "sides" we just shrug. They have us exactly where they want us.
Our wonderful media is fully bought and paid for and complicit. Plus, we have so many new opiates of the masses: hell, Michael Jackson dying was good for 3-4 weeks, while they slipped Goldman Sachs another trillion out the back door. Race-baiting is always good for top headlines, while the men behind the curtain do their thing. Sports, Idol, 150 TV channels, us vs. them politics; all to distract and deflect.
I doubt we will ever learn, though.
> Bush and the GOP created this Mess. Obama is doing a good job trying
> to clean up their pooh.
What a load, please turn off the TV for a few days.
1. This was caused by government bureaucracy, some democratic and some republican. All put their during Bush's, Clinton's, and now Obama's terms. It happened because the SEC failed to investigate/regulate. The same SEC people in charge for Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. Come on try to find some facts before you post. Bush's problem was that he did not fire all of the Clinton Democrats in the SEC and DoJ. So he is not without fault, but its not solely his.
2. Since 2006 no legislation could pass without some Democrat approval. Meaning they could also have blocked it. Check the numbers in congress. There is no way anyone can find a way to solely blame the GOP unless they are nothing but a political hack.
3. Presidents do not pass legislation.
Ideology will not save this country. Grow up and develop some brain cells.
In regards to Mr. Obama's comments, I suggest that his staff economists provide a refresher lesson on what full employment entails. Specifically, the concepts of frictional and structural unemployment.
If Mr. Obama follows through on his initiative of ultimately lowering employment past the point of full employment, this will only cause massive inflation and hurt all Americans. I hope that this was merely rhetoric.
On Aug 02 08:59 AM I need more cowbell wrote:
> Ladies and gentlemen, so much "he did, they did". This is not about
> Dems vs. Repubs- they all SUCK.
I'm so tired of see that guy stirring the pot every day until the pot breaks.
Obama is Truely a BAD President.
One thing critical to lower the risk is to free up the credit markets so that business can operate unimpeded by the threat of little or no credit. The Fed has made radical moves to free up credit from where it stood last Fall, but more is still needed.
A second item is to insure business that government will not derail business plans by introducing more taxes, and regulation that stymie growth.
I wonder how requiring medical insurance, cap and trade legislation, 'card check' legislation, new and longer state requirements for the extension of unemployment in future years for all states accepting unemployment stimulus money, government-run automobile companies, and a ruling party that has a history of espousing protectionist rhetoric fits in with creating jobs? How long must Obama drone on with this 'boob food for the bubbas' rhetoric before even the liberal news media asks pertinent questions?
> Obama could not tell the truth under any circumstances. If his telepromter did have the truth he would find different words. He is a phoney, an American hater, a deceiver and a destroyer of all he touches. The man is evil.,
You forgot to mention he is also a racist.
Also remember his wife getting $317K annual compensations/bribes after Obama became a US Senator for a part-time 20-hours per week diversity promotion job.
"I've always been of the opinion that private employer jobs will be
created when the risks to investment are low compared to the prospect for gain."
Hit the nail on the head Duude on all your comments. Small employers will stay as small as possible in order to keep under the micromanaging lawyers in Congress who have decided they know best how to run a business although few ever have raised their own capital or met a payroll from their own funds. The more expensive it is to have an employee, the fewer there will be. And not enough people have business skills to create their own business (although Avon, Tupperware, et al try to help them) and so can only wait until someone else is rich enough to employ them. NOONE is predicting when employment will pick up and Obama is only hoping it will.
On Aug 02 11:20 AM erod1944 wrote:
> If Obama would just REST, the economy could heal.
>
> I'm so tired of see that guy stirring the pot every day until the
> pot breaks.
>
> Obama is Truely a BAD President.
www.liveleak.com/view?...
On Aug 02 01:42 PM Mad_Max_A_Million wrote:
> What some folks are expecting Obama to do is to put aside community
> organizer politics and to look at the broader good. That experience
> is not in his resume. He only has experience in the area of securing
> other people’s money in order to target specific special interest
> clients. Cash for Clunkers was one example, i.e. The Auto industry
> which he already owns (in votes). Plotting full employment could
> be well above his pay-grade and that of the socialist-educated staff
> and czars that advise him.